Belling the Cat: On Special Status and Citizenship Rights

It has been the second case this year. A couple of days ago, a number of newspapers reported the fact that the MLA Mickky Pacheco had accused the Superintendent of Police, Mr. Allen D’Sa of being a Portuguese national. The earlier instance of such a case, was that of Ms. Valanka Alemão accusing her rival in the legislative assembly elections, MLA Caetano Silva, of being a Portuguese national, and hence incapable of representing the constituency of Benaulim.

On the face of it, it appears that both these accusations are unfortunate since what they are in effect doing is to ruin the public secret that is allowing a number of average (the popularly phrased aam aadmi) Goans to find jobs overseas, especially in Europe, and better their life chances and those of their children. By creating a public controversy about the possibility that these two men hold citizenship status in another State, what these two cases will effectively do, is draw the energies of the Indian State bureaucracy toward rooting out those Goans who hold dual citizenship. On second glance however, perhaps Ms. Alemão and Mr. Pacheco are doing the Goan population a favour since they are in effect creating the circumstances under which the Goan citizenry will have to sit up and take charge of the situation that is in effect a sword of Damocles that hangs over the heads of those who have reclaimed their Portuguese citizenship. It has been all very well that until now the enforcement by the authorities has been less than rigorous.  However, as Prabhakar Timble recently pointed out in his article in the Navhind Times, in addition to these two cases, there were also at least four cases where persons were debarred from participating in panchayat elections for reasons of holding Portuguese citizenship. The threat it seems, comes not from a possibly dispassionate citizenry, but from jealous neighbours, rivals in political contests or other familial or economic contests. We should not forget that the current legal regime not only prevents a foreign national from holding political office, but also prevents a foreign national from holding agricultural property, a situation that could possibly be used in the bitter inheritance battles that are such a marked feature of any reasonably landed family. There are good reasons necessitating therefore, a united popular response to this situation.

Fortunately for those interested in presenting a challenge to the legal regime concerning nationality, asserting their traditional and inheritable right to claim Portuguese citizenship, there already exits a somewhat active group that should logically support the right of the Goan to bear dual citizenship. For some years now, not merely citizen groups, but legislators and Members of Parliament have been demanding, through constitutional amendment, the grant of Special Status to Goa. One of the many arguments that have been marshaled for the demand of Special Status has been that this Special Status, where only Goans may purchase and trade in Goan land, is necessary to protect Goan identity. More recently, our Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar, also raised a similar issue of restricting the entry of migrants into the State to protect the same threatened Goan identity.

Upon raising this issue, Mr. Parrikar drew flak from a number of locations, and was charged with being anti-national, and secessionist. To charge a member of the RSS, with being anti-national and secessionist is laughable. But perhaps these charges were required to demonstrate the manner in which all too often the anti-national argument is irresponsibly flung despite the indubitable patriotism of the individual, and the justice of their demand. The argument that is being made is not a secessionist demand, on the contrary, it is one that needs to understand a particular history. This history was reportedly often called upon by the late Mathany Saldanha in his own arguments for Special Status for Goa. The argument of activists such as him were to point out that given that Goa was integrated into the Indian Union only in 1961, there were no Goan representative in the Constituent Assembly to secure Goan interests. As we know, right from the inception of Goa’s identity as a part of the Indian State, there have been movements that have sought to protect the identity of Goa. As such, they argue, it is now time for us to obtain Special Status, just like other smaller and threatened parts of the Indian State, to protect Goan identity in the face of inundation by larger forces.

The argument made by this segment of those demanding Special Status for Goa, can also be used to accommodate the right of Goans to hold dual nationality. If they point out that there were no representatives in the Constituent Assembly to represent Goan interests at the time of the framing of the Constitution, then it should also be underlined that the integration Goa into the Indian Union was a largely unilateral act by the Union of India, that did not respect the specificity of Goa. Indeed, as if to underline this fact, despite Nehru’s assurances, the protection of the specificity of Goa has had to be fought for in pitched battles every twenty years; 1967, 19 86-7, and since 2006.

As the article by Prabhakar Timble pointed out, the right to citizenship that Goans (and other persons from former Portuguese territories in India) enjoy is not some post-Liberation gift granted to them by the Government of Portugal, but the continuation of their legal rights from prior to the Indian action in 1961. As Timble also pointed out, if a number of Goans are utilizing this option today, it is not necessarily out of any jealous love for Portugal, but to better their socio-economic prospects. Indeed, many of those utilizing the option to regain their Portuguese citizenship continue to invest in Goa, both economically as well as emotionally. The issue of Indian insecurity in the face of citizens with dual citizenship therefore, should hardly arise, at least not in the Indo-Portuguese case (for remember we are speaking of more than just the Goans in this case).

As regular readers of this column will recollect, I have not been a supporter of the move for Special Status forGoa. This objection has been based on the fact that there has been no clear articulation of what this Special Status would mean, and what it would contain. The only consistent demand has been to restrict the ownership of land to Goans alone. This one clause will benefit, as this column has argued before, only those who currently own vast tracts of land. It will not benefit the average Goan. On the contrary it would possibly worsen their situation. However, it is clear that there are significant segments of the Goan population that are determined to gain Special Status for Goa. In such a case then, it would make sense, in keeping with the strain of arguments referred to above, that they also take up the cause of the right of Goans to retaining Indian citizenship, while reclaiming their Portuguese citizenship. To do so, would ensure that the interests of a large segment of blue collar Goans would not lose out on their domestic interests while pursuing overseas their dreams for their family’s welfare.

(A version of this post first appeared on the Gomantak Times 26 Sept 2012)

Errata:  A paragraph above reads "We should not forget that the current legal regime not only prevents a foreign national from holding political office, but also prevents a foreign national from holding agricultural property, a situation that could possibly be used in the bitter inheritance battles that are such a marked feature of any reasonably landed family."

This is a mistaken representation. The regulations prevent a purchase of agricultural property by Persons of Indian Origin. Further, there may not be a sound basis to suggest that agricultural property cannot be inherited.

This mistake is regretted.

Love, Sex, aur Dhokha: Sexual harassment on a bus journey between Mapusa and Panjim

Given that the past week or so in Goa has been of torrid sexual drama, it seemed appropriate that this column too jump into the fray. Most sexual stories get told from the male point of view, and this story will be no exception. Where this narration will differ however, is how this particular male gets treated. In this story, the narrator is victim, rather than the victor or voyeur.

My story begins onboard a Kadamba shuttle service between Mapusa and Panjim. Not left with much seating choice, I moved to the back of the bus where the 5 seater held three men. There was a young man in his mid-twenties on one side, a possible 10 – 12 grader boy dressed in shorts on the other. In the centre was a rather personable young man in his late twenties to early thirties. No sooner had I settled down, than he flashed me a charming smile, asking “newspaper?” Given that I was fortuitously carrying one in my bag I handed him the newspaper. He flashed me another broad grin while asking me where I was from; “Goa?” I rolled my eyes, and responded, rather aggressively, that I was from Goa “Why? Don’t I look Goan?”

Having thus beaten him to silence, I retreated into my own personal world as we bumped our way toward Panjim. A couple of seconds later he gamely slid away from me and slapped the seat space between the two of us. Since I had managed, in the process of seating myself, to get squashed between this charmer and the twenty-something young man, I thought that the ‘charmer’ was making more space for me. A few seconds later however, I realized that the charmer had slid over merely to create space for the huge bag that the boy, on the other side of the seat, was carrying on his lap. Trying to make the best of the situation, I decided a couple of minutes later to use the bag as an arm-rest. Imagine my horror when I saw, as I turned around, the use my newspaper was being put to! Our charmer has ensured that while his hand away from me was holding the newspaper, it was also resting on the bare thigh of the young boy. The other hand was using the newspaper to screen this circumstance from the rest of the bus should they choose to look back.

‘Ok buster’, I thought to myself narrowing my eyes ‘I know what you’re up to!’ The boy though seemed oblivious to the location of the Charmer’s hand and was babbling away breathlessly. Taking this for some kind of consent from the boy, I looked away and decided (I now think wrongly) to mind my own business. A couple of minutes later, the charmer was back by my side, another winning smile, returning my newspaper and making small talk. After some perfunctory small talk about the location of where one should store cell phones on one’s person, I dove into the newspaper shutting him out of my space.

Now you have to remember that all this while we continue to bump our way towards Panjim. In the course of this ride, as I struggle to keep my eyes on the newsprint, I am convinced that the charmer’s hand is grazing my wrist rather deliberately and insistently. Since I don’t want to jump to conclusions, I decide that it’s just a result of the journey and my now hyperactive imagination. This state of mind lasts until with the next bump when the charmer’s hand is lightly, but quite surely around my wrist!

“How does one respond to this situation”, I asked myself as I pretended to focus on the paper. First the whole situation is rather and obviously embarrassing, and secondly, while I didn’t appreciate the sexual attention, I didn’t want to be the guy who initiates a session of old-fashioned gay- bashing. Fortunately for me I managed resolved the situation by quickly and deftly lifting his hand off my wrist, placing it on the bag and continuing to read the paper. The charmer mumbled ‘I’m sorry’ (not that I believed he was) and I feigned a distracted nod indicating that it was nothing as I pretended to be immersed in the newspaper. We reached Panjim without further incident and none of those winning smiles from the charmer.

While the power dimensions between two men are somewhat different as that between a woman and a man, I was nevertheless able to estimate something of the position women are placed in when they encounter such unsolicited sexual advances. For starters, one asks oneself whether one has given any indication that we are open to these attentions. I knew enough in this case to say that indeed I did not. The second issue one has to deal with is how, does one fend this person off. Invariably in the case of men propositioning women, the issue is not really a desire for sexual relation as much as it is the desire for conquest. In societies like ours, where the ideal male is seen as a hunter, it is through conquest that the male becomes in fact a Man. For the woman to indicate displeasure, and not be backed up by a crowd therefore, is to perhaps invite renewed and redoubled advances. Like I indicated earlier, between men the power equation is rather different (though this really does not hold for the charmer’s interaction with the boy), but one is still placed in the delicate, and for most men unique, situation of having to resolve the issue. When the expected social role for men is to be the hunter, rather than the hunted, such unwelcome sexual advances are invariably responded to with violence. For the gender and politically sensitive however, this is not really an option. Such a route merely re-inscribes the dominant expectation of what it is to be a man, and perpetuates homophobia. To resolve this situation through public shaming without violence, is to court becoming the butt of public ridicule. After all it isn’t particularly manly to be seen as attractive to other men, even if you have not been sending out any signals. Besides, in using shame and not violence, one is not really using one’s male prerogative of violence, and displaying in this manner, one’s lack of masculinity and therefore culpability.

As the Pacheco story develops perhaps we will realize that there are deeper and more devious political games being played. However in the interim it would be worthwhile to contemplate the manner in which the sexual practices of our society, that is the manner in which sexuality, masculinity, femininity and power interact, are as responsible for this mess, as the personal actions of those involved.

(First published in the Gomantak Times, 16 June 2010)